User talk:Daringindividual42
Welcome Hi, welcome to Creepypasta Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Thread:507235#2|creepy-pasta ideas you can use page. Please be sure to check out all the Site Rules, as it is important to follow them. Failure to abide by them may result in your account being blocked. Read some new pastas by checking out or browse by topic by checking out the Genre Listing. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! WhyAmIReadingThis (talk) 16:01, November 6, 2015 (UTC) Re: Your edits were reverted because the original version was correct. For example, a comma doesn't need to be put in front of "and" in all cases, only when it's acting as a conjunction and connecting two independent clauses. The latter ("Nothing about conditions where the patient sees spirits possessing loved ones and sending them to their deaths." vs. " I found nothing about conditions where the patient sees spirits...") really both work even though the first is more fragmented so I shifted to the author's preference. While I'm not a big fan of broken/fragmented sentences when used in small amounts they can be a stylistic choice rather than an error that needs to be corrected. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 20:37, November 23, 2015 (UTC) : I understand on the fragmented sentence. If the writer intends it that way, I suppose that's fine. However, we'll have to agree to disagree on the comma issue. In every case I added a comma, it was to connect two independent clauses. For example, he has "I’ve taken up painting and it’s very liberating." That clearly needs a comma before the "and". You are linking two completely different sets of subjects and verbs. More specifically, you're linking different types of verbs. This is the same case in all of the areas I put commas. Unless you're using a different grammar system than what's taught in the United States, I'm not sure I understand your viewpoint. Daringindividual42 (talk) 13:42, November 24, 2015 (UTC)Daringindividual42 Cacodemon Edits Just to settle this discussion and throw in my two cents: epistolary narrators rarely have a perfect grasp of the english language, hence I'm lax about cleaning them up. To a certain extent, it makes the narrative more believable: Ted the Caver is a rhetorical train wreck, but it's also written as a public caving blog, not the work of an english major. If the subject is a story that is written by a character within the universe, nitpicking grammar rules and sentence structure is pointless except in two cases: 1) When the mistakes conflict with the way the character ought to be writing. An English professor should be using perfect English all the time out of habit. 2) When the meaning of a passage is too unclear without the fix. I've undone a number of edits that were gramatically correct, but went against what I was trying to do. This especially applies to editing dialogue, which is almost never gramatically correct in real life: nitpicking the grammar of a country bumpkin's lines erases an entire facet of the character (that's a more extreme case than Cacodemon, but you see what I mean). In short, just because it can be fixed, doesn't mean it needs to be. Consider the style and clarity of the passage before making grammar edits.--Mikemacdee (talk) 10:47, December 10, 2015 (UTC) That is very insightful, and I appreciate your thoughts. Thank you! Daringindividual42 (talk) 13:34, December 11, 2015 (UTC)Daringindividual42 That Wasn't Him story Admittedly, the pacing of your story could be called slow (I personally didn't have a problem with it). On the other hand, I actually thought this was a strength of the story as it allowed for some character development of the neighbors and Chloe. This allowed the reader to feel more invested in their deaths. It also gave the main character a semblance of normality which made me anticipate the paranormal things that were bound to happen. All in all, it's a good story! Jikininki (talk) 23:09, April 11, 2016 (UTC)